If the BCS Process really is a valid process, how is it that Georgia in ranked #10 in the BCS? Georgia is ranked #11 in both the Harris Poll and Coaches Poll, yet they come in ranked #10 in this week's BCS Poll? The scapegoat? Try the computers, yet when I evaluated over 50 stat components this week in my weekly KSI (Key Stat Indicators) Index Rating, Georgia comes in at #17 among the 19 remaining teams that have any chance of playing in the BCS Championship game.
Here is this week's KSI Index Rating:
2. Kansas State
4. Florida State
6. Mississippi State & Oregon
7. Notre Dame
11. Texas Tech
13. Oregon State
15. Boise State
17. Ohio State
If I was Oregon, I would be worried because it is the computer rankings that are keeping Oregon below Kansas State. Chip Kelly is noble for taking his starting line-up out of the game after halftime with his team leading by an average of 40 plus points at intermission, but is this strategy a wise one given the BCS Computer Input?
If K State is undefeated by seasons end, Oregon will not catch K State if it is indeed the computer formula that is holding the Ducks back. Personally, I believe the Big-12 and SEC have hijacked the system and those computer numbers don't add up to diddly-squat.
I believe it is a Trojan horse that provides the BCS Godfathers with plausible deniability in creating order out of chaos so they can plug the teams in there that create the highest ratings for the media and mulitinationals.
The key for me is Georgia at #10, which props up the other horses in the SEC, and completely flies under the radar.
If the BCS is truly measuring the computerized statistics in measuring the three pronged formula for the BCS, how can Georgia be ranked #10 when they are #17th out of the 19 remaining one loss or undefeated's alone.